1. Field of the Invention
As chronicled in the above referenced '722 Patent, event tables proliferate, wherever folks assemble regularly. Every hotel, arena, meeting hall and lodge has at least several such tables, which they dutifully assemble and disassemble for each event; push them together or pull them apart as needed, and cover up the seams with table cloths.
The referenced '722 Patent, perhaps the latest innovation to come to the event business in several years, as good as it is, lends itself to further improvement, particularly in areas which reduce the cost of manufacture while increasing efficiency and safety.
To that end, the present invention is directed to adjustable devices which accomplish that end, while permitting much of the hardware to be cast rather than fabricated, resulting in considerable savings in cost.
2. Overview of the Prior Art
As is evident from a cursory review of the art recited in, and with respect to, the aforesaid '722 patent, advances in event tables are few and far between. There seems to be a benign acceptance within the field that the square-to-round table of Sullivan U.S. Pat. No. 4,646,654, at least until the advent of the '722 patent, was about as good as it gets. The appearance of the '722 patent has caused many in the industry to rethink their concepts.
The concept of interlocking tables was essentially a novelty until Baker '722 demonstrated how it could become practical. Others, such as Shettles U.S. Pat. No. 3,342,147, have made an early attempt at locking tables together rather than pushing them together, throwing a table cloth over them and hoping for the best.
Sapp U.S. Pat. No. 2,836,475 suggested, in 1958, that event tables be joined by means of a spring loaded pawl. Neither of these ideas took root.
Since the height of the event table was often dictated by the type of event, others, including Baker '722, directed their attention to the adjustability of the table legs. Ideas ranged from the most rudimentary telescoping legs of the ironing board of Teduschi U.S. Pat. No. 4,991,325, to the seemingly complex system of Terres et al. U.S. Pat. No. 4,949,649. Baker '722, over which the present invention constitutes a distinct improvement, settled for opposed spring loaded pins which were manually manipulated and required enough digital leverage to overcome the spring bias.